LAS VEGAS, NV, USA
N303AT
PIPER PA-23-250
THE FLIGHT WAS RETURNING TO ITS HOME BASE AFTER A DUAL INSTRUCTIONAL SESSION. THE DUAL STUDENT WAS FLYING THE AIRPLANE AND ALLOWED ITS FINAL APPROACH FLIGHT PATH TO BECOME TOO LOW AND FAST. THE CFI ASSUMED THE CONTROLS AND EXECUTED A GO-AROUND AND REENTERED THE TRAFFIC PATTERN. THE CFI RELINQUISHED THE CONTROLS TO THE STUDENT AFTER EXPLAINING WHAT THE STUDENT HAD DONE WRONG. WHILE ON FINAL APPROACH, THE AIRPLANE'S AIRSPEED WAS TOO FAST. WHEN THE AIRPLANE WAS ABOUT 1/4 MILE FROM THE APPROACH END OF THE RUNWAY, THE CFI ASSUMED THE CONTROLS, BUT DID NOT EXECUTE A GO-AROUND. INSTEAD, THE CFI RETARDED THE THROTTLES AND LANDED ABOUT 1/3 BEYOND THE END OF THE RUNWAY AT A HIGH AIRSPEED. THE CFI DID NOT BELIEVE HE HAD SUFFICIENT RUNWAY REMAINING TO EXECUTE A GO-AROUND AND HE ATTEMPTED TO STOP BUT THE AIRPLANE EXITED THE RUNWAY AND COLLIDED WITH A DITCH. ACCORDING TO THE CFI, THE AIRPLANE LANDED WITH AN EQUIVALENT DIRECT TAILWIND OF 6 KNOTS. THE APPROACH CONTROL REPORTED THE SURFACE WINDS TO BE A LEFT QUARTERING HEADWIND.
On February 18, 1994, at 2045 hours Pacific standard time, a Piper PA-23-250, N303AT, overran runway 36 during the landing roll at Sky Harbor Airport, Las Vegas, Nevada. The pilots were completing a local visual flight rules instructional flight. The airplane, operated by Proflight, Inc., Las Vegas, Nevada, sustained substantial damage. The certificated commercial pilot/certified flight instructor (CFI), the certificated private pilot/dual student, and the two passengers were not injured. Visual meteorological conditions prevailed. The flight originated at Sky Harbor Airport at an undetermined time and flew to North Las Vegas Airport; the flight departed North Las Vegas Airport at 2030 hours. The CFI submitted the required Pilot/Operator Aircraft Accident Report, NTSB Form 6120.1/2; the operator did not submit the required report. In the report, the CFI said that the student was flying the airplane when the flight entered the downwind leg for runway 36. While on final approach, the student allowed the airplane to get too ". . . low and fast. . ." and the CFI assumed the controls and executed a go-around. He then reentered the traffic pattern. The CFI explained to the student what he did wrong and then returned the controls to the student. The student ". . .overshot . . ." the final approach course and when he aligned the airplane on the final approach the airplane's airspeed was too fast. The CFI told the student to correct the airspeed, but he failed to do so. When the airplane was about 1/4 mile from the approach end of the runway, the CFI assumed the controls. The CFI retarded the throttles and landed the airplane about 1/3 of the runway distance beyond the threshold. The airplane's airspeed was fast and the CFI believed that he did not have sufficient runway remaining to execute a go-around. He then attempted to stop the airplane with mechanical and aerodynamic braking, but was unsuccessful. The airplane exited the end of the runway and collided with a ditch collapsing the nose landing gear. The pilot reported that the surface winds were from 240 degrees at 16 knots which is equivalent to a 6 knots tail wind. He also said the Las Vegas Approach Control advised him the surface winds were from 310 degrees at 9 knots. Neither the CFI nor the operator provided the National Transportation Safety Board with the names and addresses of the passengers.
THE CFI'S IMPROPER REMEDIAL ACTION BY FAILING TO GO-AROUND INSTEAD OF LANDING, THE CFI'S EXCESSIVE TOUCHDOWN SPEED, AND HIS FAILURE TO OBTAIN THE PROPER TOUCHDOWN POINT. THE DUAL STUDENT'S INITIAL EXCESSIVE AIRSPEED AND THE DITCH WERE FACTORS IN THIS ACCIDENT.
Source: NTSB Aviation Accident Database
Aviation Accidents App
In-Depth Access to Aviation Accident Reports
